A/HRC/13/40/Add.2 allegedly underwent numerous bureaucratic procedures, which resulted in long waiting periods for the necessary documentation, and intervention from the local community which is against such projects. The relevant authorities often reject applications for building permits by religious minorities arguing that the development plan does not foresee a religious building on this piece of land. However, the small religious communities claim that the development plans often do not provide any such designated areas at all, which obviously adversely affects their possibility to manifest their religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching. 44. Some members of religious minorities reportedly also face discrimination when they wish to bury family members. This problem is aggravated if the deceased previously belonged to a different religious community, whose leadership then objects to a burial in a particular part of a municipal cemetery. Although the local authorities have to take care of the cemeteries in a non-discriminatory manner, the Special Rapporteur was informed that the two biggest religious communities in practice behave as if they were the sole owners of the cemeteries even if the members of the religious minority have their family graves in this area and have paid for burial places there. 45. On a more positive note, the Special Rapporteur welcomes the policy of denationalization of assets belonging to religious communities. A number of religious communities have already benefited from the 2000 Law on Denationalization. For instance, the religious properties that belonged to the Jewish community were restituted in 2002 and, through an agreement concluded in December 2007, the Government also restituted heirless Jewish property in the country. However, the claims of some other religious communities remain pending to this day. The Special Rapporteur would like to stress that religious sites and places of worship have an emotional and spiritual significance for the believers. It is therefore important to resolve these issues in a sensitive and transparent manner. In this regard, the controversy concerning the reconstruction of the Carshiya mosque in Prilep, which was built in the 15th century and destroyed in 2001 during the internal armed conflict, is one example that needs to be looked into. In addition, the above-mentioned intra-religious tensions often also relate to places of worship and related ownership issues, which requires a careful and neutral assessment by all relevant authorities and courts. E. Incitement to religious hatred 46. The Special Rapporteur is concerned about the number of reports she has received regarding expressions of incitement to racial or religious hatred, which contribute to creating a climate of intolerance and threaten the security of individuals. According to the information received by the Special Rapporteur, reports that were filed by members of religious minorities concerning concrete cases of incitement to violence against them were not followed up by the local authorities. Impunity in cases of incitement to religious hatred unfortunately emboldens forces of bigotry. In an otherwise tolerant society, the Special Rapporteur was saddened to learn that there have been some cases of mob violence, threats and extreme forms of pressure against members of religious minorities. 47. The Special Rapporteur also received information that the vague formulation of article 319 of the Criminal Code to combat incitement of national, racial or religious hatred, discord and intolerance was allegedly misused against a particular religious leader, Bishop Jovan (Zoran Vraniskovski).26 In 2004, the domestic courts of first and second instance held 26 See the related allegation letters sent by the Special Rapporteur on 13 October 2003 and 15 March 2004 (E/CN.4/2004/63, para. 48 and E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1, para. 241) as well as the Government’s reply of 26 January 2004 (E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1, paras. 242-257). 15